Quality diligence
Methodology review, baseline scrutiny, permanence and leakage assessment, plus developer track record.
Carbon Markets
The gap between the best and worst credits in this market is enormous, and price is a poor guide. We run the diligence, source directly where possible, and document the reasoning behind every purchase.
Instruments
Credits, RECs and I-RECs answer different questions. Using the wrong instrument for a claim is a common and avoidable disclosure error.
Service
Methodology review, baseline scrutiny, permanence and leakage assessment, plus developer track record.
Relationships with developers reduce intermediary layers, improving both price and traceability.
Balanced across project type, geography, vintage and delivery risk rather than concentrated in one bet.
We confirm the instrument actually supports the claim you intend to make before you buy it.
Registry retirement executed and evidenced, with serial numbers filed against your disclosure.
We track developments affecting held or retired units, including methodology revisions and registry actions.
Questions
They serve different purposes. Removals are the only category that can neutralise residual emissions in a net zero claim. Avoidance credits can support broader climate contribution claims but should not be presented as neutralisation.
Under the market-based method, yes, provided the certificates meet GHG Protocol Scope 2 quality criteria including geographic and temporal matching. You must still report the location-based figure alongside it.
It is a real risk, which is why we document diligence and diversify portfolios. If a methodology is revised or a registry acts against a project, we notify you immediately and help you assess disclosure implications and remediation options.
Tell us the claim you need to support and we will tell you which instrument genuinely does it.